What Covid vaccine mandate means for you

The Supreme Court’s decision that mandatory ­vaccination orders against dozens of police and health workers were unlawful has raised a lot of questions for workers. Here, we answer them.

The Supreme Court’s decision that mandatory ­vaccination orders against dozens of police and health workers were unlawful has raised a lot of questions for workers. Here, we answer them.

WHY WERE THEY IN COURT?

In late 2021 and early 2022 directions were issued by the Commissioner of Police and Dr John Wakefield (the Director-General of the Department of Health) stating employees in the Queensland Police Service and the Queensland Ambulance Service were required to receive Covid-19 vaccinations and booster doses. If the employee did not comply with the directions then they were liable to disciplinary sanctions, up to and including, sacking.

WHAT HAPPENED?

Dozens of police and QAS employees challenged the directions by the Commissioner Katarina Carroll and Dr Wakefield in the Supreme Court and on Tuesday won.

A judgment summary from the Supreme Court states:

In the QPS case “The Commissioner, in making the decision to issue the directions, failed to give proper consideration to human rights relevant to the decision. Although she was provided with Human Rights Compatibility Assessments she did not consider them before making the directions. As a result, the decisions and the directions were unlawful.”

In the QAS case “The Director-General submitted that he was able to make the direction because he had the power under an implied term of the employment agreements for QAS employees. He had to prove that the direction was made in that way. He failed to do so and, as a result, the direction has no force.”

CAN THE OFFICERS AND PARAMEDICS WHO TOOK ACTION AGAINST THEIR EMPLOYER FACE DISCIPLINARY ACTION?

The QAS and QPS are banned from disciplining any of the paramedics and police officers involved in the decision.

WHAT IS CLIVE PALMER’S INVOLVEMENT?

United Australia Party chairman Clive Palmer funded the case to the tune of $3m and has previously thrown his support behind the police officers fighting the mandate, calling Ms Carroll’s decision “un-Australian”. Some of the officers and paramedics involved in the case were represented in court by solicitor Sam Iskander, of Alexander Law, who has previously acted for Mr Palmer and Israel Folau in legal action in his bid to return to rugby league.

WHAT DOES IT MEAN FOR OTHER CASES OF HEALTH WORKERS WHO LOST THEIR JOBS OR WERE PUNISHED FOR NOT BEING VACCINATED?

Health Minister Shannon Fentiman said the directives of QPS and QAS were “very different” to health directives meted out by Queensland Health, and anyone who had left the health service before the vaccine mandate was overturned was “absolutely welcome” to return.

WHAT DOES THE NURSES PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION OF QUEENSLAND (NPAQ) SAY THEY ARE DOING?

The NPAQ are seeking legal advice about what their next steps should be to get nurses and doctors stood down over their stance on vaccine mandates back to work.

“The NPAQ has over 400 stayed human rights complaints pending test cases and we are hopeful that the Supreme Court outcome will prove to be favourable for our other cases. Approximately 3000 healthcare workers are currently absent from our public healthcare system due to the vaccine direction from September 2021. Nurses have continued to be terminated after the revocation of the mandate in September 2023, some as recently as two weeks go,” Ella Leach NPAQ state secretary said.

WHERE TO FROM HERE?

The state government is considering the decision handed down by the court. The QPS said they are considering their options moving forward.

Clive Palmer says he will consider funding other court battles over Covid-19 vaccine mandates and a class action against the government.